The hue and cry over He Waka Eke Noa (HWEN) has been considerable, which I suppose is to be expected. In many cases ignorance is bliss and the amount of ignorance attached to much of the criticism has been massive.
What irritates me is the media blindingly accepting the criticism of the uninformed. For example, we’ve heard the rabid voices of Greenpeace and others talking about factory farming in NZ.
Much of the mainstream media accepts that ridiculous mantra and runs it unquestionably.
If we were debating the issue in a court of law we would rely on the definition provided by the Oxford Dictionary. That dictionary describes factory farming as “a system of rearing livestock using highly intensive methods by which animals are confined indoors under strictly controlled conditions”.
That doesn’t happen in New Zealand and any media reporting that is both lazy and ill-informed.
We don’t have factory farming in NZ. We ethically produce grass-fed animal products for the world markets. Our management practices are second to none, we survive totally on a grass-fed system and our animal welfare is exemplary by any world standard.
In addition our greenhouse gas footprint per unit of production is by far the lowest in the world, which begs the question as to why the media is so anti-farming?
Correspondingly, not a lot of coverage was given to the fact that NZ’s food and fibre exports raised a record $52.2 billion, up 10% on the previous year. That’s despite covid-19, punitive Government regulations, a war in Europe and the massive disruption of supply chains.
What hasn’t been in the media is that we’ve achieved that with a reduction of 13% of the productive land. Food and fibre production is the only show in town. Not that you’d read about it. The barriers to that continuing are massive.
For a start we have Government regulation. For example, the Government’s National Policy Statement on Biodiversity has been described by Beef + Lamb as “badly timed and ill-considered”.
I’d agree.
Federated Farmers considered it “pious and under-funded”. Again, I’d agree but why would you? The bottom-line issue is that currently farming is all we have. It’s got us through the tumultuous past three years and it is the country’s main game. The borders are open, the tourism sector can’t get cheap labour to survive and their carbon footprint is considerable. We should be encouraged, not leg-roped by ridiculous legislation.
My angst was exacerbated by a media report telling me that “global veganism is imperative for the survival of humanity”. That was according to Nobel Laureates, 14 cities and 40,000 individuals. I’d respectfully suggest that with a global population of eight billion people, 40,000 individuals were statistically insignificant. They didn’t say who the Nobel Laureates or cities were but it wouldn’t have been Eketahuna. They’re more sensible in Eke. The quotation was from an IPCC expert reviewer, one Dr Peter Carter. Like you, I have a problem with that.
For a start, on our property you may be able to cultivate four or five hectares but I’d need to purchase a four-wheel drive tractor, get some irrigation and apply bucket loads of fertiliser.
That aside, this Dr Carter told me that “a global climate catastrophe could not be averted without the elimination of meat and dairy from our diets”. That was followed by Vegan Society Aotearoa president Claire Insley,telling me that “diet is something you can change really easily, really quickly. You don’t need any new technology for it, we don’t need to get a silver wand or any magic to make it happen.”
She added “far more people can be fed with plants per acre than by animal farming”. I hadn’t figured you could grow lettuce on our coastal Wairarapa hill country or mung beans on the Maniototo.
My respectful opinion is that she wouldn’t have a clue.
Anyway, this IPCC expert reviewer Dr Carter comes from British Columbia, he is a doctor of medicine. He’s integral in the Climate Change Emergency Forum that was intimately involved in the talkfests that were COP 25 and 26. He has a highly qualified group of colleagues with degrees in engineering, physics, climatology, English literature, psychology, structural engineering, library and information and adult education. I can only assume that the qualifications for an IPCC expert reviewer are distinctly negotiable.
What I find encouraging is that our sector can survive and prosper under some massive headwinds. We continue to produce for the good of NZ when other sectors of the economy are falling over.
We have right on our side when it comes to ethical food production, yet reading and listening to the mainstream media you’d think we were raping and pillaging the planet a little like the Mongols of old.
There’s no acknowledgement of us saving the NZ economy and with it our lifestyle.
